# Nixon's Madman theory, Trump, Putin. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 27, 2016, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405 "2016-03-27T22:39:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2016, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/1 "2016-03-27T22:39:21Z")
I must admit that I was, before the recent [NYT article about their foreign policy interview with Trump](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/us/politics/donald-trump-foreign-policy.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news) referenced it (see below), ignorant of Nixon’s “Madman theory.” > [@NYT](#): > > Like Richard M. Nixon, Mr. Trump emphasized the importance of “unpredictability” for an American president, arguing that the country’s traditions of democracy and openness had made its actions too easy for adversaries and allies alike to foresee. > > “I wouldn’t want them to know what my real thinking is,” he said of how far he was willing to take the confrontation over the islands in the South China Sea … About [the Madman theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory): > [@](#): > > The madman theory was a primary characteristic of the foreign policy conducted by U.S. President Richard Nixon. His administration, the executive branch of the federal government of the United States from 1969 to 1974, attempted to make the leaders of other countries think Nixon was mad, and that his behavior was irrational and volatile. According to Nixon’s theory, leaders of hostile Communist Bloc nations would then avoid provoking the United States, fearing an unpredictable American response. … It seems to me that Putin to some degree has adopted that position (or is in fact crazy) and used it to some degree of success. Lawd knows the world would be convinced that Trump would be irrational and volatile. I know I am so convinced. The point of this thread however is not to discuss Trump but the rationale of the Madman theory. Was Nixon correct or does _predictability_ help foster international stability? ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2016, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/2 "2016-03-27T22:59:32Z")
no, it does not. If you don’t know what people might do, you don’t know what they might do. So you have to be ready for anything, including missiles coming at you. Launch on warning? Not good, given that warnings could be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2016, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/3 "2016-03-27T23:06:30Z")
Unpredictability might enhance one side’s advantage. If we don’t know if Putin will or will not invade Lithuania, we have to devote resources to be ready to react to that possibility…no matter how insane it is in reality. But it does the exact opposite of promote stability. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2016, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/4 "2016-03-28T00:44:18Z")
It has worked for many years for NK’s Kims, too. All it does is make people fear and hate you, and militarily contain you if they can, and launch terrorist attacks if they can’t. You don’t even have to act mad, either. Just let the country whose leadership wants to get you portray you as mad to their people, and they’ll get behind a war on you. Just ask Saddam. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2016, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/5 "2016-03-28T04:41:52Z")
Putin doesn’t seem “mad” to me. His interests don’t always coincide with the US’s but that’s not madness necessarily. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2016, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/6 "2016-03-28T13:09:35Z")
He is motivated by his own lust for power, like Saddam was, and is guided by Russia’s history of empire, including the Soviet period. Not madness. Although declaring someone to be mad is certainly a convenient way to excuse yourself from dealing with him instead of warring with him, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![davida03801](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5e925/32.png) [@davida03801](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davida03801)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2016, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/7 "2016-03-28T14:07:42Z")
In foreign policy I can see how unpredictable is a good thing, while mad man is a bad thing. I also think strong man is a different issue altogether. To me Putin is a strong man in foreign policy. The one that makes me wonder is the little man in North Korea. Definitely a strong man, or trying to be internally, also in his own way is predictable. Does he cross the barrier over to mad man is what I wonder. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2016, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/8 "2016-03-28T15:08:20Z")
The problem with the madman theory is that it eliminates the ability to build trust with ones adversary. Consider the prisoner’s dilemma. A good strategy for repeated games against the same opponent is to cooperate so long as your opponent does likewise but to punish betrayal by you opponent with immediate reprisal. This will generally result in an optimal strategy of mutual cooperation for both sides. However against a pure madman, the optimal strategy will always be against cooperation. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2016, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/9 "2016-03-28T18:10:56Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > Consider the prisoner’s dilemma. A good strategy for repeated games against the same opponent is to cooperate so long as your opponent does likewise but to punish betrayal by you opponent with immediate reprisal. This will generally result in an optimal strategy of mutual cooperation for both sides. Funny, I came in to compare this to the prisoner’s dilemma as well, where madman and cooperation are comparable to confession and silence respectively. I think the real difference, though, is that, at least for Nixon, and any “players” in a cold war version, there really is only one iteration. In an ideal world, we’re all better off cooperating, but just like in the prisoner’s dilemma–where the global optimum may be cooperation, the personal optimum is always achieved by confessing–you only get once chance to play because the stakes are potential annihilation, so it unfortunately leads to sub-optimal global results like mutually assured destruction and unpredictable leaders. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2016, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/10 "2016-03-28T19:43:07Z")
Even in an adversarial context I’m dubious unpredictability garners any kind of valuable advantage. The crazier you appear only dilutes your adversaries conflicts with each other. “Listen, I know we have some bad blood and all from the hostage crisis awhile back, but that Nixon dude is batshit. How about we work together?” Nixon would lie to his Secret Service about crap like the date of his wife’s birthday, not sure he was the calculating political genius he is made out to be by some cause that sounds more like a mild mental illness. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2016, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nixons-madman-theory-trump-putin/750405/11 "2016-03-28T19:50:18Z")
I’ll throw this out. Lets assume you are a “reasonable guy”. Somebody wants X. You’'ll give Y. And the negotiations continue. If you are a bit “too” “easy”, the “other guys” figure out it is pretty easy to push you to the limit of what you’ll accept…and that limit will be at the limit of what any “reasonable” guy will take. OTOH, you can be a “reasonable” guy…but also the “crazy guy”…but if they push you too far and you go batshit crazy and go all “fuck you bastards…now I’m going two steps back and you can take it or suck on it for all I care” then the other side will probably be a bit hesitant to push the negotiations to the point of maximum benefit for themselves.